BoxRec

got inspired to ask this by reading an espn article today, as mentioned in the article my pick would be Euginia Williams' scoring the 5th to Holyfield against Lewis (I). In a fight of that magnitude, with literally the whole world watching, how could she fornicate that up so badly. Watched the fight many times and Evander gets a complete drubbing in the 5th, how the fornicate did Ms Williams give him that round??

Any other picks?

I don't know/remember enough of the judges card to pick a specific judge and a specific round.

BUT, I wouldn't mind picking any number of the rounds in the Augustus vs Burton fight.

Also, any number of the rounds in the most recent Carl Thompson fight.

Plus any number of rounds in the WBU title fight between Colin Dunne and Lester Jacobs.


On a related matter, anyone know why the WBU abolished the 20 point scoring system. Glad they did, but I'm sure that did implement it for a period.

any of the rounds in reid/ottke?

There's so many examples of bad scoring. 'Irish' Micky Ward picked up a 10-7 round in the ninth round of his first classic with Arturo Gatti - despite scoring only one knockdown in the round. The judge involved, Dick Flaherty, hailed from Micky's home state of Massachusetts.
A 10-8 round would have made the fight a deserving draw.

A Candian judge, Guy Jutras, gave Marvin Hagler a 10-8 round against Roberto Duran in 1983. It was round six. No knockdowns.

Sugar Ray Leonard got a 10-8 round from American judge Dalby Shirley in the last round of his rematch with Tommy Hearns in 1989. Ray would have lost without that score. He salvaged a draw.
The other two judges, by the way, had it 10-9 for Leonard. No knockdowns.

great calls Bennie....
Your knowledge and memory is incredible

I hated SRL even more after that robbery versus Hearns...

Duane Ford in the frst Hopkins-Taylor match gave the last round 10-9 to Taylor. Had he scored it for Hopkins which he should of, Hopkins would still be champion right now, assuming a rematch wasn't necessary.

I was under the impression that you don't need to knock some down to get a 10-8 rd.

I was under the impression that you don't need to knock some down to get a 10-8 rd.

thats true, as I understand it 10-8 rds can/should be given even without a knockdown if fighter A is Completely dominating fighter B. Like Scott Harrison battering Wayne Mc pillar to post in many of their rounds, Wayne didn't go down but he was taking a hammering and offering little in return. Thats a 10-8 rd IMO.

That doesn't apply though to Hagler/Duran or SRL/Hearns, thats incorrect use of 10-8.

When Alan Minter won the world title against Antuofermo in Las Vegas it was a seen as a pretty close fight, and went to a split decision.

But one of the judges, Roland Dakin from England, gave Minter something like 14 of the 15 rounds - which was pretty embarassing seeing as he was allegedly seen travelling over to the USA on the same plane as the Minter camp, laughing, joking and generaly having a great time.

I cant remember the fighters or the judge. But in a polish fight the hometown was knocked down (It would be a normal 10-8 round to his opponent) but the hometown fighter actually won it 10-9 on one of the judges scorecards.

SM2006 wrote:

I was under the impression that you don't need to knock some down to get a 10-8 rd.

thats true, as I understand it 10-8 rds can/should be given even without a knockdown if fighter A is Completely dominating fighter B. Like Scott Harrison battering Wayne Mc pillar to post in many of their rounds, Wayne didn't go down but he was taking a hammering and offering little in return. Thats a 10-8 rd IMO.

That doesn't apply though to Hagler/Duran or SRL/Hearns, thats incorrect use of 10-8.

I definately agree regarding Hagler vs Duran, although Leonard vs Hearns was pretty dominant. Hearns did have a good minute of round 12, but Leonard bashed him for the remaining two minutes.

I did think there was a probably a bigger case though in the 5th round of that fight.

Surely Jerry Roth's card must be more questionable (for those who saw it as a robbery). He scored the 12th only 10-9 but still had the fight in Leonard's favour.

I actually thought that the draw was probably a fair reflection. Hearns did nothing from rounds 5-10. He never recovered from that pummeling in the fifth untill he floored Leonard in the 11th. I think there were a lot even or Leonard rounds there that the commentators didn't score, but the judges did as all three had it close.

Riddick Blowe wrote:any of the rounds in reid/ottke?

That match stands out more for the ridiculous reffing by Tillerman than any unusually Ottkeian scoring.

Warning Reid for having the temerity to hit Ottke in the face with an actual punch. You could see Reid realise he was on the end of a right royal rogering.

Yeah i've always been of the opinion that Reid didn't work enough in the second half of the fight to say it was a complete robbery by the judges but the ref of course had an effect on that with his warning Reid for hitting Sven etc

Reid should have won the fight but the way some people remember it he also won every round and fought a good fight as well as having the ref against him

SM2006 wrote:my pick would be Euginia Williams' scoring the 5th to Holyfield against Lewis (I). In a fight of that magnitude, with literally the whole world watching, how could she smeg that up so badly. Watched the fight many times and Evander gets a complete drubbing in the 5th, how the smeg did Ms Williams give him that round??

I Absolutely agree. I just checked the punchstats, Holyfield threw 30, landed 11. Lewis threw 57, landed 43. Also, Holyfield spent almost a full minute up against the ropes taking punishment, and the only punches he landed were in clinches.

Another bad one cost Billy Hardy the IBF bantamweight title in his challenge to Orlando Canizales in 1990. An Italian judge scored the last two rounds even - when Hardy dominated them! (Canizales could barely see: his left eye shut and his right eye swollen.)
At the finish, Dave Parris had Hardy ahead 116-113. An American judge scored 115-113 to Canizales.
The Italian judge scored 115-114 to Canizales.


American judge Lou Filippo scored rounds three and four to Hagler in that controversial fight with Leonard in '87 - when Hagler seemingly gave them away!
The other two judges awarded the first four to Leonard.

Coconut wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:any of the rounds in reid/ottke?

That match stands out more for the ridiculous reffing by Tillerman than any unusually Ottkeian scoring.

Warning Reid for having the temerity to hit Ottke in the face with an actual punch. You could see Reid realise he was on the end of a right royal rogering.

I remember seeing the scorecards for that fight, and they were ridiculous.

Ottke, who did nothing for the 1st 5 rounds, won 4 of the first 6 rounds on two of the cards, and 5 of 6 on the others.

Then, over the second half of the fight, when Reid went into a shell for fear of a DQ, they gave reid, 4 of the last 6 on two cards, just to make it look a bit less suss.

If ever there was a case where a fighter had the ref and judges onside, that was it.

How about Vanzie-Earl 2, Earl is knocked down legitimately, the ref not only rules it a slip but awards the round to Earl!!

Not sure for the main part on round scoring I only really pay attention to the final score cards, which are way off more often than they're right.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Coconut wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:any of the rounds in reid/ottke?

That match stands out more for the ridiculous reffing by Tillerman than any unusually Ottkeian scoring.

Warning Reid for having the temerity to hit Ottke in the face with an actual punch. You could see Reid realise he was on the end of a right royal rogering.

I remember seeing the scorecards for that fight, and they were ridiculous.

Ottke, who did nothing for the 1st 5 rounds, won 4 of the first 6 rounds on two of the cards, and 5 of 6 on the others.

Then, over the second half of the fight, when Reid went into a shell for fear of a DQ, they gave reid, 4 of the last 6 on two cards, just to make it look a bit less suss.

If ever there was a case where a fighter had the ref and judges onside, that was it.

Completely agree the scorecards are awful, but I did agree with the overall score, if you obliged to the referee's rediculous docking of points. I think Ottke did win the fight, but scored it opposite to the judges.

So yes, it could be argued that all 12 rounds of this fight were odd.

Defenately Reid vs Ottke the opening rounds. Reid kept him at a distance and Sven couldn't do a damn thing, yet he got the rounds.

Many of the rounds in Mads Larsen vs Ottke. Ottke could get close to Larsen yet he ended up winning the fight.

Round 4 being scored 10-9 for Floyd vs Judah on Hamada's card.

Mattyp151 wrote:Round 4 being scored 10-9 for Floyd vs Judah on Hamada's card.

Yeah that is some bizzaro scoring. I hear Hamada gave Floyd every round except the last?? He needs to retire if that's the case.

Good line from Sports Illustrated writer: When Zab knocked down Roger Mayweather in the 10th round brawl, he felt he had to give that one to Zab 10-8

Arsenal wrote:I was under the impression that you don't need to knock some down to get a 10-8 rd.

This is true and I think 10-8 and 10-7 rounds should be used more frequently.

A guy shading a round with a couple of jabs is not the same as a guy outworking a guy 4 punches to 1 yet results in exactly the same scoring. 10-9. Stupid if you ask me.

By the way Arsenal are getting pasted in an hours time Come on you Spurs.

I also think the 10-8 score should be used more frequently, if a fighter wins a round big and lands lots of punches and the next round his opponent wins the round with minimal action shouldn't a difference be made? Anyway onto bad round scoring, i mentioned it the other day but was re-watching Beyer-Lucas recently and the scoring is so corrupt, how any of the first 4 rounds can be given to Beyer is beyond me. He does less than nothing, same as Ottke-Reid. The scoring seems sometimes pre-meditated, check for Robin Reid getting token rounds he didn't do enough to win or were debatable and then losing rounds he clearly did win